• vzq
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    deleted by creator

    • qevlarr@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      25
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      Britain is also pretty far on the police state track, if you ask me. It makes sense that these novels are from there. How they are criminalising public protest, journalism (hi Assange!), etc. They don’t realize that “see it, say it, sorted” is creepy as hell like it was lifted straight from 1984

      • vzq
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        deleted by creator

      • DragonTypeWyvern@literature.cafe
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        I just wish people would recognize “Freedom of speech isn’t freedom from consequences” is one of the most fascist things ever said.

        Like, there are so many better ways to phrase the underlying thought that don’t sound like you’re about to sentence someone to the mines for insulting the state.

        “Freedom of speech isn’t a guaranteed platform”

        “Freedom of speech only applies to governmental censorship”

        “Freedom of speech applies to more people than just you, chucklefuck”

        Etc etc

        • Blóðbók@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          I’m curious as to what you think about the actual meaning of those sentences, then. Do you think that there ought to be protection against consequences, regardless of what one says? Should there be any exceptions at all? What is the domain of applicability? Certain types of expression, certain types of topics, intended audience, etc?

          Edit: oh and what about freedom from? Is there any situation in which a person has a right to shut someone down from “expressing themselves” to them without their consent?

    • EdibleFriend@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      9 months ago

      That one is getting close to reality too. America fell. England a crazy over the top surveillance state.

    • MrEff@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      9 months ago

      Did we watch the same movie? Or read the same comic? From its wiki:

      “V for Vendetta is a British graphic novel written by Alan Moore and illustrated by David Lloyd (with additional art by Tony Weare). Initially published between 1982 and 1985 in black and white as an ongoing serial in the British anthology Warrior, its serialization was completed in 1988–89 in a ten-issue colour limited series published by DC Comics in the United States.”

      It was british in the comic…

      Plot summary of movie?

      “Following world war, London is a police state occupied by a fascist government, and a vigilante known only as V (Hugo Weaving) uses terrorist tactics to fight the oppressors of the world in which he now lives. …”

      British in the movie.

      Now, to be fair, the screenplay was written by 2 Americans who loved the comic and it was directed by an Australian. Your downvotes are coming from you jumping onto the “amerikkka bad” train without any real connection here.